John Dominic Crossan and Post-Modern Structuralism - Part II of II

Jon posted a very thoughtful comment and question in response to my article on John Dominic Crossan.

First, Jon's question .

Jon said...

"...Crossan believes that there is no history beyond language—history is not a concrete reality consisting of actual past events, but rather is constructed through language about past events."

Can you provide a quote from Crossan to support this? While I do not have a great familiarity with Crossan or structuralism, what little I have read seems very inconsistent with your argument here. That is, they do not deny that there is a reality and history independent of language, but that our understanding of history and reality are dependent upon and limited to the structure of our language(s).

Very well put, Jon.  

In my last post, I outlined Crossan's views on language, metaphor, history, and reality.  Now, I'd like to expand upon that, and consider how Crossan's structuralism impacts his historical Jesus research, particularly his study of Jesus's resurrection.  Again, this material is derived from my dissertation, which is accessible here.

Licona's Resurrection Masterpiece, Part I - Philosophy of History

The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach.  By Michael R. Licona.  Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2010, 718 pp., $40.00. 

The resurrection of Jesus Christ stands at the center of the historic Christian faith, making it a focus of scholarly theological focus.  The Apostle Paul declares that if Christ has not been raised, then Christian faith is in vain (1 Cor. 15).  The resurrection is also the key historical miracle-claim in Christianity, making it a focus of scholarly historical investigation.  Given that the resurrection is a riveting topic of theological and historical investigation, it is no surprise that scholarly articles and books focusing on the resurrection continue to proliferate.  By Gary Habmeras’ count, there were approximately 3400 journals and books written in English, German, and French, on the subject of Jesus’ resurrection between 1975 and 2002 (see particularly his 2005 article on the topic in the Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 3.2).

Michael R. Licona’s The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (IVP Academic, 2011), represents a substantive scholarly contribution to the wealth of academic literature on the resurrection.  Licona serves as Research Professor at Houston Baptist University, and is a popular apologetic speaker and well-known debater, having engaged (among others) Bart Ehrman, Elaine Pagels, Shabir Ally, and Richard Carrier.  Licona’s Resurrection is an excellent addition to the corpus of literature on the historical core of Christianity, an absolute must-read for resurrection buffs, and a necessary resource for historical Jesus scholars.  In this series of 4 blog essays, I intend to engage in an in-depth examination of Licona’s book.  I will provide a brief summary of the broad structure of Licona’s work.  I will lay out key sections of his dissertation more thoroughly in order to highlight unique contributions he makes to the scholarly discussion.  I will then critically engage key sections of his argument.

Licona’s research began with the observation that studies of Jesus’ resurrection are marked by a lack of consensus,

Review of Darrell Bock, "Recovering the Real Lost Gospel"

Bock, Darrell L. Recovering the Real Lost Gospel: Reclaiming the Gospel as Good News. Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010.

Over the past two weeks, I have been working through Darrell Bock’s Recovering the Real Lost Gospel: Reclaiming the Gospel as Good News, a relatively compact 136-page read. Bock writes out of concern that when “some people preach the gospel today, I am not sure I hear its presentation as good news.” (2) Sometimes the gospel is a therapeutic call to self-healing; sometimes it’s only about a transaction (“a kind of spiritual root canal”); sometimes it’s only about avoiding God’s wrath; sometimes it’s about transforming political structures alone. Bock aims to discuss key biblical texts in order to answer the question: “What does the Bible say about the gospel?” (2) His thesis is that “the gospel is good news, and its core is a restored relationship with God.” (1)

Music, Media, and Movies: The Quest for the Minds of America - Part III of IV. Legend or Lord? Jesus in Popular Culture

Music, Media & Movies: The Quest for the Minds of America
St. Stephen’s Church, Louisville KY

Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Part III. Legend or Lord: Jesus in Pop Culture

I. INTRODUCTION – Review of Last Week

Two weeks ago we began our survey of Music, Media, and Movies with a survey of “The War of Worldviews: The Cultural Battle for the American Mind”. I proposed that we can all become critically engaged participants in popular culture by asking four reflective questions. (1) How does this affect me? my walk with God? (2) What standards of behavior are promoted or normalized? (3) What worldview/philosophy is promoted or normalized? (4) How does this reflect God’s truth? God’s kingdom?

Last week we looked particularly at biblical sexual ethics and the sexual ethics presented in popular culture. We looked at various aspects of sexual morality, but there were a couple of things that we did not get around to, which I would like to mention briefly before we get into this evening’s topic of conversation (the presentation of Jesus in popular culture).

The Redemption of Suffering Through Resurrection

The following is the text from a biblical meditation on suffering and the resurrection of Christ, a message preached through a translator (the multi-talented and always-wonderful Rosalyn Lo) in the Cantonese worship service at Edmonton Chinese Baptist Church.

NOTE: Particularly acute observers will note that this post bears a striking resemblance to an earlier blog entry ... I am indeed aware of that.


July 11, 2010 – Suffering in Light of the Resurrection of Christ

Suffering is a universal fact of human life. Everybody experiences pain, loneliness, grief, or sorrow - in one way or another, we all hurt. As a teenaged atheist, I despised suffering, particularly because it seemed pointless. There was no hope in the midst of grief, no redemption in the midst of pain; nothing to mitigate or offset the severity of suffering. However, coming to know Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord has changed the way that I perceive suffering. This morning, I want to suggest to you that the resurrection of Jesus Christ informs and transforms our experience of grief, sickness, pain, “senseless” tragedy, and persecution - suffering is redeemed and made comprehensible through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The empty tomb assures our own bodily resurrection and eternal life and gives us an eternal perspective that looks beyond our temporal situation.

The Historical Evidence for the Resurrection

My last post explained the centrality of Christ's resurrection within the Christian faith. In this post, I wish to survey the historical evidence that shows that Jesus truly did rise from the dead.

At the beginning, however, I want to remind all who are reading this: if you have comments or questions, please post them up as comments. I will respond. This blog is intended to be an interactive site, particularly geared to those who are in my Sunday School class. So please feel free to ask questions or make comments - I love the opportunity to interact and dialogue.

THE HISTORICAL EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION

So, what are the historical and logical reasons to believe that Jesus really rose from the dead? At the outset, I want to stress three things. First, I am not going to be able to go in-depth into any one of these lines of evidence. Last year I taught a three-month Sunday school course on the resurrection of Jesus Christ at our church, and we still didn’t exhaust the materials! So please understand that this is a greatly condensed presentation of the evidences supporting the resurrection.

Second, each of the historical and evidential lines of support for the resurrection which I am going to mention has extremely broad, nearly universal support amongst scholars. That is, over 95% of all scholars who study in this area (especially speaking here of ancient history and biblical studies) grant the truth of each line of evidence that I will present (except one, which we will discuss). This scholarly consensus includes biblical scholars who reject the truth of the resurrection, even the most radical and sceptical scholars out there. In other words, the level of support for these lines of evidence is truly astounding.

Third, the evidence I will present does not presume the inspiration of the Bible. I personally believe that the Bible is God’s inspired, inerrant, authoritative Word revealed to us. But the arguments I will present do not depend upon that view of the Bible (although I would argue that true Christianity generally does). This is why even critical and skeptical scholars can embrace the truth of each of these lines of evidence. With all that said, let’s look at the six lines of historical evidence.

I. Historical Evidence for the Truth of the Resurrection

There are six lines of evidence which I want to briefly present, all of which are like planks in an argument. Each plank points with greater or lesser strength towards the truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. But when you put them all together, the conclusion that Jesus truly rose from the dead is nearly inescapable. There is no other logical conclusion. Let’s look briefly at these six lines of historical evidence supporting our rational belief that Jesus Christ rose from the dead.

1. JESUS WAS CRUCIFIED AND DIED

This might seem somewhat obvious. Obviously, Jesus’ death is a prerequisite to His resurrection. And virtually no one outside of the Islamic faith today doubts that Jesus died by crucifixion sometime around the year AD 30. The Gospels all record the death of Jesus Christ – and ancient historians accept the general historical reliability of the Gospel accounts. Furthermore, Jesus’ death is referred to in extrabiblical accounts – the Jewish historian Josephus, the Roman historian Tacitus, the Greek satirist Lucian, and the Jewish Talmud all reference Jesus’ death by crucifixion. His death is also affirmed by a truly countless number of early Christian writings. There really is no doubt that Jesus rose from the dead, Muslim protestations to the contrary.

2. JESUS WAS BURIED

Presently, we are going to discuss the reality of the empty tomb. Well, for a tomb to be “found empty”, it has to have been previously occupied. And so the second historical plank in our rational argument for the resurrection is that Jesus was buried in a tomb. If He is never buried, there is no tomb to be discovered empty. If He is buried, then there is a tomb to check up on. For the burial of Jesus, we are dependent upon the biblical accounts in the gospels and 1 Corinthians. But again, with respect to the burial of Jesus, biblical scholars are almost unanimously agreed that there is no reason to doubt that it really happened. John Dominic Crossan (of the Jesus Seminar) is one of an exceptionally small number of scholars who cast doubt upon the burial. And Crossan himself has to violate his own critical methodologies in order to reject the burial. Despite the fact that Jesus’ burial by Joseph of Arimathea occurs in every gospel, in even the most ancient strata of the gospels, Crossan nonetheless rejects it as an unhistorical invention by later Christians. His counter-argument? That Jesus was never buried at all, but that His body was cast into a shallow grave and eventually eaten by wild dogs. Sadly for Crossan, there is simply no evidence which supports this thesis, and it is rejected by almost every biblical scholar and ancient historian.


3. THE EMPTY TOMB

Given the death and burial of Jesus, the other physical prerequisite to the resurrection would have to be the discovery of the empty tomb. Of the six facts that I am talking about this morning, the reality of the empty tomb is the only one that does not have nearly-unanimous agreement amongst biblical scholars. Still, over two-thirds of critical scholars accept that the tomb that Jesus was buried in on Good Friday was found empty on Easter Sunday. While not unanimous, this level of scholarly support is astounding, given the importance of the empty tomb in arguments for the resurrection. Why ought we to believe that the tomb was, in fact, found empty on Easter Sunday?

On the one hand, the Gospel accounts, and the other New Testament letters, all state and presume that Jesus’ tomb was found empty. Each Gospel has an account of the tomb being found empty. But there are other reasons as well.

First, you have the reality that Jesus was crucified and buried in Jerusalem. As Gary Habermas writes, “It would have been impossible for Christianity to get off the ground in Jerusalem if the body had still been in the tomb. His enemies in the Jewish leadership and Roman government would only have had to exhume the corpse and publicly display it for the hoax [of the resurrection] to be shattered. Not only are Jewish, Roman, and all other writings absent of such an account, but there is a total silence from Christianity’s critics who would have jumped at evidence of this sort.” In other words, as soon as the disciples began preaching that Jesus was raised from the dead, their opponents (including Saul/Paul) would have leaped at any opportunity to produce Jesus’ corpse in order to debunk the resurrection claims. But they could not.

Instead, opponents of Christianity acknowledged that the tomb was found empty – and then accuse the disciples of having stolen Jesus’ body. Matthew 28:11-15 reports that the chief priests concoct a plan to accuse the disciples of stealing Jesus’ body. While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, telling them, "You are to say, 'His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.' If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble." So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.

The 2nd-century Christian writer Justin Martyr writes, in Dialogue with Trypho, that the Jews were still circulating the same rumor in 150 AD (more than 100 years later) – that the disciples had stolen Jesus’ body. In other words, even the enemies of Christianity acknowledged that Jesus’ tomb was empty – they did not argue that Jesus hadn’t been buried at all (as the historical revisionist Crossan argues), or that Jesus’ body was still in a tomb somewhere. They admitted that the tomb was empty, and accused the disciples of stealing the body.

4. DISCIPLES CLAIM TO HAVE SEEN JESUS

The apostles universally claimed to have seen Jesus, after His crucifixion, death, and burial – no longer dead, but alive and walking about in a resurrected body. Again, the ancient creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 – For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. The resurrection appearances of Jesus Christ are not all at the same time, nor in the same place. Rather, they occur over the course of about 40 days, in Jerusalem, but also in Galilee. Some of the resurrection appearances are recorded in the New Testament – Matthew 28:8-10, 28:16-20; Luke 24:13-52; John 20-21; Acts 9 – while other resurrection appearances are not, for example the appearance to James, which we are told happened but is not described.

There are a few significant things about the appearances of the risen Jesus to the disciples. First, He appears not just to isolated individuals, but to groups, and even to at least one large group of about 500. That means that these are not delusions or personal visions experienced by the disciples.

Second, He appears to His half-brother, the skeptic James, who did not believe in His identity as Messiah prior to His crucifixion and death (see Jn. 7:5; Mt. 12:46; Mk. 3:20-21). James subsequently becomes a believer, and emerges as a key leader of the church in Jerusalem.

Third, He appears to Saul (we know him as Paul), an ardent persecutor of the Christian Church – a man who believed that Jesus died as a false prophet cursed by God. Subsequent to seeing the risen Jesus (an experienced described in Acts 9, and recounted again in Acts 22 and Acts 26), Paul becomes a follower of Jesus, and later emerges as a key leader, especially in the evangelistic missionary movement throughout the Roman Empire.

Fourth, the appearances of the risen Jesus are unapologetically physical in nature. The risen Jesus is no mere ghost or ephemeral spirit – He appears in a flesh and blood resurrected body.

Thus, in John 20:24-28, we see Jesus invite Thomas to touch the nail-holes with his fingers, to touch the wound in his side with his hand. Jesus says, Stop doubting and believe! Thomas touches Jesus, and exclaims, My Lord and my God! In Luke 24:36-43, we see Jesus insisting: Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have. The resurrection appearances of Jesus to the disciples are explicitly claimed to be physical, bodily appearances. We are not left the option of somehow assuming or concluding that the resurrection appearances are ghostly, or immaterial, or metaphorical, or anything other than literal, physical, bodily appearances. The Gospels all make it exceedingly clear – what the disciples claim to see is the risen bodily Jesus. But at this point, all that we have are professed resurrection appearances – the disciples claiming to have seen the risen Jesus. How do we know that they are telling the truth?

5. DISCIPLES ARE TRANSFORMED

A popular argument against the real resurrection of Jesus Christ often has to do with supposing that the disciples made up the story of the resurrection – maybe they stole the body and invented the resurrection; or at the very least, when the tomb was inexplicably found empty, they made up stories of having seen the risen Lord Jesus. The truth that we are about to contemplate destroys such theories.

Call to mind the state of mind of Jesus’ disciples after He was arrested, tried, crucified, died, and buried. First, the disciples all desert Jesus and flee when He is arrested (Mt. 26:55-56). Peter denies even knowing Jesus, calling down curses upon Himself (Mt. 26:69-75). In Matthew 27, Judas is overcome with grief and sorrow and commits suicide (Mt. 27:3-5). With the sole exception of John, the disciples are nowhere to be found at the scene of the crucifixion – they have all run away and are cowering in fear. John 20:19 presents the disciples on Easter Sunday as gathering together in an upper room with the doors locked for fear of the Jews.

Simply put, the disciples were a disillusioned, despondent, and fearful group. Shortly thereafter, however, subsequent to Jesus’ death by crucifixion, His disciples were radically transformed from fearful, cowering individuals who denied and abandoned him at his arrest and execution into bold proclaimers of the gospel of the risen Lord. They remained steadfast in the face of imprisonment, torture, and martyrdom.

From fleeing in terror during the trial of Jesus, the disciples are transformed into men who fearlessly preach that Jesus has been raised from the dead. Acts 4, beginning in verse 8:

Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to [the rulers of the Jews]: “Rulers and elders of the people! If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a cripple and are asked how he was healed, then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. He is ‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the capstone.’ [Ps. 118:22] Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”

When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.

Peter has been transformed – he is no longer cowering in fear, denying that he even knows Jesus. Rather, he is boldly proclaiming the name of Christ. The Sanhedrin warns Peter, v. 18:

Then they [the Sanhedrin] called them [Peter and John] in again and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John replied, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God’s sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.”

What causes that transformation in Peter? The simplest explanation, and the right one, is that they saw Jesus, risen from the dead, and that this changed their lives. The martyrdom of Stephen in Acts 7 does not reduce the disciples’ resolve; nor does the martyrdom of Peter, Paul, James, and all of the other disciples except John. Indeed, Stephen’s martyrdom scatters the early Christians, but everywhere they go, they continue to preach the Good News of Jesus crucified and risen.
Again, it is good to remember that all of the historical sources that we have record the martyrdom of all of the original disciples except John – and even John suffered exile and deprivation on account of the Gospel. If the disciples made up the story of the resurrection appearances, don’t you think that they would have given up the story at some point along the road rather than going to their death for it?

At this point a skeptic might point out that people die for causes all the time, and often the causes that they die for are lies. There is, however, a crucial difference. People will die for a lie that they believe to be true; but people do not willingly die for something they know to be a lie—it simply doesn’t happen. So, on the one hand, Muslim mujahaddin will die for Islam, believing that Islam is the true religion, the straight path, and that dying for Allah will grant them immediate entrance into paradise. They are, from our viewpoint, dying for a lie—sometimes believing that their suicide bombings of targets like the World Trade Center or a nightclub in Bali are earning God’s eternal favor. They are dying for a lie. But the key is that they are convinced that they are dying for the truth.

People will die for a lie that they believe to be the truth, but they will not die for a lie that they know to be a lie. Here’s the kicker. The disciples knew whether Jesus had been raised from the dead or not. After all, they were the witnesses to the fact! Acts 2:32 puts it very succinctly and plainly – “God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact.” The disciples did not die for something that they mistakenly thought was true; they did not die for something they knew to be a lie. Rather, they died for their absolute conviction, their personal experiential knowledge, that Jesus is risen. It is good at this point also to note that the disciples were not persecuted and martyred for proclaiming some sort of mystical, spiritual, or metaphorical resurrection of Jesus Christ – nobody would have much cared if that is what they were preaching – rather, they were persecuted for proclaiming their sole allegiance to a King who had conquered death through His physical resurrection. And they died for a belief that they knew to be either true or false – either they had seen the risen Jesus, or they had not. If they had not, it is simply inconceivable that they would have all willingly suffered and died for what they knew to be a false claim. The only rational conclusion is that they in fact died for something – the resurrection of Jesus Christ – which they knew to be true.

6. THE BIRTH OF THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM

Finally, let’s consider the birth of the Christian Church. Jesus of Nazareth was arrested, tried, and crucified in Jerusalem – the center of the Jewish religion and the Israelite people. Where was the Christian Church born? In Jerusalem. Within 2 months of Jesus’ death, the disciples began preaching publicly. Let’s read just a sampling from Acts 2 – Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost.

Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge, and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him … God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact.

One of the central tenets of the early preaching of the Christian Church was the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. And this message was preached in Jerusalem, the very city where Jesus had so recently been put to death. Again, all of the historical sources that we have relate the early and public preaching of the Gospel; they all indicate that the Church began in Jerusalem, and that the resurrection was a core element of that preaching.

If the resurrection never happened; if Jesus’ body was still lingering in some tomb, or if it had been buried in a common grave for criminals, Jerusalem is the last place that the Christian Church would have sprouted. It would have begun in some backwater like Galilee, where no one could have checked up on the facts concerning the burial and tomb. In Jerusalem, there was so much publicity, so much awareness, that it was not possible to fool the authorities or the people. But the church not only begins in Jerusalem, it expands exponentially. There is rapid growth, which is not checked by the breakout of intense persecution as recorded in Acts 7-9.

II. Putting it all Together: The Rational Conclusion

Let’s quickly put these six lines of evidence together. First, Jesus is crucified in Jerusalem. Second, He is buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. Third, His tomb is found empty on third day. Fourth, the disciples (including James and Paul) claim to have experiences where they see the risen Jesus. Fifth, the disciples are transformed from fearful cowards into bold and fearless proclaimers, suffering and even dying for the message that Jesus died for our sins and rose again on the third day. Sixth, the Gospel message is preached within months of the death and resurrection of Jesus, in the very city and place where these events happened.
There is much more to the argument. The Christian Church is born in Jerusalem, and immediately begins preaching the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. But these early Jewish Christians (followers of Jesus who had been faithful God-fearing Jews) have their entire worldview and religious practice changed. We’re not going to look deeply into it, but take note of a few things that change.

First, they not only go to synagogue on the Sabbath (Saturday) to worship the Lord, they also begin, very early on, gathering for Christian worship on the first day of the week (Sunday), in recognition and celebration of Christ’s resurrection.
Second, they begin praying in Jesus’ name, and worshiping Jesus as God – something inconceivable within a Jewish worldview. Third, they profess the secondary nature of the Jewish temple rituals which had been central to their Jewish religion. In short, everything changes. N. T. Wright, in his massive study The Resurrection of the Son of God, concludes that there is only one rational conclusion to come to when all of the evidence is considered and weighed. There is only one thing that explains the change in the disciples, that accounts for the discovery of the empty tomb, and that can make sense of the rapid rise of a Christian Church with a radically new religious worldview. There is only one reasonable conclusion, and it is the same conclusion that orthodox Christians have universally believed for over 1900 years. Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God, who died on the cross in order to atone for our sins and wrongdoing, was raised from the dead on the third day by God the Father. There is no other rational, clear-headed conclusion.

The Importance of the Resurrection

The Importance of the Resurrection

Last week I mentioned in passing the doctrinal core of historical Christianity. (1) Jesus is God incarnate. (2) Jesus died as an atonement for sin. (3) Jesus rose from the dead. (4) Jesus determines our eternal destiny. If you leave any of these core beliefs out, then you have left behind true Christianity.

Of this doctrinal core, I would argue that the resurrection is actually the center of the Christian faith. As essential as the incarnation and the atoning death of Christ both are, it is the resurrection which is the central event of the New Testament. Indeed, I submit to you that without the resurrection of Jesus, there is no Christian Church, there is no Christian faith, and we are not having this conversation. Let’s look briefly at the importance of the resurrection, both in the New Testament itself and in our Christian faith and practice.


A. The Resurrection in the New Testament

1. The Gospels

Each of the four New Testament Gospels ends with an account of Jesus’ tomb being found empty, and the risen Jesus appearing to His followers. Mark 16:1-8 contains a fairly brief account of the women discovering the tomb empty, and being told by a young man dressed in a white robe (almost certainly an angelic messenger) that Jesus has risen from the dead and gone ahead to meet the disciples in Galilee.

Matthew 28 contains a somewhat longer and more elaborate account of the women’s visit to the tomb, and recounts Jesus appearing to both the women and the eleven disciples on a mountain in Galilee.

Luke 24 shares a similar account of women discovering the empty tomb and encountering two white-clad messengers (again, probably angels) saying that Jesus has risen. The disciples do not believe the women’s report (v. 11), so Peter runs to the empty tomb and finds it empty. Luke also recounts the risen Jesus appearing to two forlorn followers on the road to Emmaus that first Easter Sunday (v. 13 – ‘Now that same day’), and to a gathering of the disciples in Jerusalem.

John 20 begins with the discovery of the empty tomb by a woman (this time, only Mary Magdalene is mentioned), who is later visited by two angels. Peter and John both run to the empty tomb. Later that night, Jesus appears to the disciples in Jerusalem, but Thomas is not with them. A week later (v. 26) Thomas and the rest of the disciples see the risen Jesus again. John 21 records further resurrection appearances, this time in Galilee. There is a miraculous catch of fish, and then the famous reinstatement of Peter as an apostle of the Lord.

From the four canonical Gospels, then, we can establish the following general pattern of events. (

1) Women (including Mary Magdalene, Salome, and Mary the mother of James) go to Jesus’ tomb on the first day of the week (Sunday) to prepare his body for burial, only to discover the stone rolled away and the tomb empty.
(2) Two or more angels (appearing in human form, dressed in white) assure the women that Jesus has risen from the dead, just as He predicted.
(3) The women tell the disciples what they have witnessed.
(4) The male disciples do not believe them, but Peter and John check out the tomb, finding it empty just as the women said.
(5) The risen Jesus first appears to Mary Magdalene (Jn. 20:13-18), then appears to two followers traveling to Emmaus, then later that evening to the gathering of disciples in Jerusalem (Lk. 24:13-49; Jn. 20:19-23).
(6) A week later, Jesus appears again to the disciples gathered in Jerusalem, including Thomas (Jn. 20:24-29).
(7) An unspecified amount of time later [probably a week or so], the disciples return to Galilee, and Jesus appears to them there (Mt. 28:16-20; Jn. 21:1-23).
(8) Sometime later [forty days after the resurrection, according to Acts 1:3], Jesus leads the disciples to Bethany, outside of Jerusalem, and ascends into heaven; the disciples then return to Jerusalem and set up the early church (Lk. 24:50-53).

2. The Acts of the Apostles
What do you consider to be the center of the Gospel message? If you are going to preach about the center of the Christian faith, what do you focus on? Most often, I think, Christian preachers tend to focus on the crucifixion as the center of the Gospel message. There is certainly good reason for doing so. Mark’s Gospel has been called a ‘headlong rush to the Cross.’ John’s Gospel focuses heavily on the hours immediately preceding the crucifixion. And indeed the atoning death of Jesus Christ is at the very core of what it means to preach the Gospel.

But: What was the central focus of the Gospel as preached by the early church? The crucifixion was no doubt central – hence Paul proclaims “I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.” (1 Cor. 2:2) But it is also evident from the earliest Christian preaching that the resurrection of Jesus was often the central focus.

Acts 2:14-36 contains a synopsis of the first Christian sermon, preached by the Apostle Peter on the Day of Pentecost in Jerusalem.

Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say. These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning! No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:
“In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.

“I will show wonders in the heaven above and signs on the earth below, blood and fire and billows of smoke. The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord. And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Joel 2:28-32)

Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. David said about him:

“I saw the Lord always before me. Because he is at my right hand, I will not be shaken. Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices; my body also will live in hope, because you will not abandon me to the grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay. You have made known to me the paths of life; you will find me with joy in your presence.” (Ps. 16:8-11)

Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said:
“The Lord said to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.’” (Ps. 110:1)

Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Now tell me, what is the center of this first Gospel message? Many things are mentioned, but I would argue that the clear center is the resurrection of Jesus. “God raised him from the dead … it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him … David spoke of the resurrection of the Christ … God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact.” Peter keeps coming back to the vindication of Jesus Christ expressed through his resurrection from the dead.

There are, of course, many more excerpts of apostolic sermons contained in the Book of Acts – by Peter in 3:12-26 and 4:8-12; by Stephen in 7:2-53; and finally by Paul in 13:16-41; 17:22-31; 22:3-21; and 26:2-23. The resurrection is stressed to a greater or lesser extent in each of these sermons. Sometimes it is quite clearly not the center of the preached message; but it is always present.

3. Paul’s Letters
To round off our study of the centrality of the resurrection in the New Testament itself, I would like to look at two passages from Paul’s letters.

(a) Romans 6:1-14
What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin – because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.

Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.

In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive in Christ Jesus. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.

Throughout this passage, Paul relates the resurrection of Jesus Christ to the present faith experience of Christians. “Just as Christ was raised form the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” Jesus did not just die for the forgiveness of sins; he rose from the dead to bring new life to His followers. The crucifixion on its own, without the resurrection, is ultimately a hopeless death. Paul stresses that we identify and enter into both the atoning death and the glorious resurrection of Jesus Christ – partially in this mortal life, but fully in the life to come. This theme becomes even more apparent in 1 Corinthians 15, arguably the most important New Testament text with regards to the resurrection of Jesus.

1 Corinthians 15
Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance:

I want to stop there for just a moment to make sure you understand what’s going on here. Paul is not just reciting here in 1 Corinthians 15 his own personal understanding of Christianity. Rather, the passage which follows, through to verse 8, is an ancient creed which far predates Paul’s usage of it. Paul emphasizes this fact – what he received from others, he is now passing on to the Corinthian Christians. This isn’t Paul’s statement of faith – this comes from the early church, dating, according to most scholars, within 5 years of Jesus’ death and resurrection. This is ancient church tradition and teaching – not some later legend added upon the original historical core of the Christian faith.

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

This creedal passage emphasizes the early Christian belief in the resurrection, but doesn’t necessarily outline the reasons why the resurrection matters. What follows, however, does. Let’s pick it up again in verse 12.

But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile, you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.

B. Two Reasons why the Resurrection of Christ Makes All the Difference

1. Assurance of our own Eternal Life: The Hope of the Gospel

Paul preaches that the resurrection of Jesus Christ makes all the difference in the world, and gives two primary reasons for it. First, and most importantly, Jesus’ resurrection is the assurance of our own future resurrection to eternal life. If Jesus is not raised from the dead, then we have no hope for eternity either. Hence the conclusion – if only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men. From the atheist perspective, Christians are laughably naïve and foolish – we put our hope in pie in the sky bye and bye; when in reality after we die they think we’re going to rot in the grave and be eaten by worms. If that’s really what happens, then indeed we are to be pitied more than all men. The reality of the resurrection is therefore crucial to the hope of the Gospel. The Gospel proclaims not merely that Jesus died for the forgiveness of sins. If that was the end of the story, we would still be men and women without ultimate hope. Sure, we would have forgiveness in this life – liberation from sin and freedom from guilt. But the power of death, the sting of sin, would still have ultimate domination over us. As Paul writes, “If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.”

2. Confirmation of Apostles’ Honesty & Integrity: Otherwise Christianity is a Lie

The second reason why Paul says the resurrection of Jesus Christ matters is that if Jesus is not raised from the dead, then Christianity is exposed as a fraudulent, deceptive religion. After all, Paul says, “we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead”. If this didn’t happen, then Paul is a false witness – as are all the other apostles. Paul goes on, however, to insist: But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. Earlier in the same chapter, in verse 8, Paul insists that he knows that Christ has been raised from the dead, because the resurrected Jesus Christ appeared to Paul himself. Paul knows that Jesus is risen.

The reality of the resurrection is thus a central issue for Christianity. The Gospels proclaim that God raised Jesus from the dead, that death could not hold him. Paul insists that if Jesus did not rise from the dead, then Christianity is a house of cards and we should all go home. I think modernists who try to redefine or otherwise minimize or deny the resurrection of Jesus should take heed of Paul’s words! Don’t pretend! Don’t bother calling yourselves Christians at the same time as you deny this central event, this crucial historical fact of the New Testament. If you deny the resurrection of Jesus Christ, as defined and explained in the New Testament, you have left the Christian faith behind. The resurrection of Jesus Christ matters.

So then the question becomes - did the resurrection happen? Is it a historical fact, or a metaphorical legend? My next blog post will deal with historical evidence for the resurrection.

Who is Jesus? The Centrality of the Person and Work of Christ

I. Introduction – Jesus as the Center of Christianity
John 8:48-59 contains a fascinating exchange between Jesus and “the Jews” (the teachers and Pharisees).

The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?”
“I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. I tell you the truth, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.”
At this the Jews exclaimed, “Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that if anyone keeps your word, he will never taste death. Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets! Who do you think you are?”
Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
“You are not yet fifty years old,” the Jews said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

Why do the Jews try to stone Jesus at the end of that passage? Because Jesus claims to be God. “Before Abraham was born, I AM.” Jesus is not just saying that he has been around since before Abraham (a claim which would be kooky enough in its own right); he is taking upon himself the divine name – the name by which the Lord revealed himself to Moses (Exodus 3:14). I AM THAT I AM. I AM – Yahweh. “Before Abraham was born, I AM.” Jesus is claiming to be God in the flesh – the claim is not explicit, but it is obvious enough that the Jews respond violently. You can hear the exasperation and disbelief in their voices—Jesus, who do you think you are?!?! This is the question that I want us to consider today. Jesus – who do you think you are?

William Lane Craig rightly argues: “The Christian religion stands or falls with the person of Jesus Christ. Judaism could survive without Moses, Buddhism without Buddha, Islam without Mohammed; but Christianity could not survive without Christ. This is because unlike most other world religions, Christianity is belief in a person, a genuine historical individual—but at the same time a special individual, whom the church regards as not only human, but divine. At the center of any Christian apologetic therefore stand the person of Christ; and very important for the doctrine of Christ’s person are the personal claims of the historical Jesus. Did he claim to be divine? Or did he regard himself as a prophet? Or was he the exemplification of some highest human quality such as love or faith? Who did Jesus of Nazareth claim to be?”

The person and work of Jesus Christ sets Christianity entirely apart from every other religion and philosophy. What we believe about Jesus is unique and determinative.

a) Jesus is God incarnate – Jesus is not just a prophet, not just a teacher, not just a good moral example. He is God in the flesh, dwelling amongst man.
b) Jesus died as an atonement for sin – Jesus was crucified and died, but His death was not a martyr’s death. His death purchased our salvation, our eternal life.
c) Jesus rose from the dead – Jesus’ death was not the end of His story. He rose from the dead, and lives on in a glorified body.
d) Jesus determines our eternal destiny – Jesus will come back to judge the living and the dead. Where we go after we die is determined by our relationship to Jesus Christ.

That’s a core set of Christian beliefs about Jesus—not exhaustive, but it expresses the heart of our faith. But an important question needs to be asked—are these beliefs about Jesus true? Is Jesus who we Christians believe Him to be? Is Jesus truly the divine Son of God who died for our sins, rose again on the third day, and will determine our eternal destiny?

Three years ago, the blockbuster movie The DaVinci Code made some striking claims about Jesus of Nazareth. The movie’s authoritative teacher, Sir Leigh Teabing, declares:

Jesus Christ was a historical figure of staggering influence, perhaps the most enigmatic and inspirational leader the world has ever seen. … The Council of Nicaea … debated and voted upon … the divinity of Jesus. … Until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet – a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless. A mortal. … Many scholars claim that the early Church literally stole Jesus from His original followers, hijacking His human message, shrouding it in an impenetrable cloak of divinity, and using it to expand their own power. … The vast majority of educated Christians know the history of their faith. Jesus was indeed a great and powerful man. Constantine’s underhanded political maneuvers don’t diminish the majesty of Christ’s life. Nobody is saying Christ was a fraud, or denying that He walked the earth and inspired millions to better lives. But he wasn’t God, and he never claimed to be.

While most people are smart enough not to take their theological education from a summer movie, the views espoused in The DaVinci Code have actually found a wide following amongst North Americans, even many Christians. The popular belief is that Jesus was a great man, a prophet, a revolutionary world-changer, but not God in the flesh. Jesus was a lot of wonderful things, and made a huge difference, but He is most certainly not who the Christian Church historically has claimed Him to be.

As Christians, we need to respond to such mistaken notions about Jesus of Nazareth, and point people towards who Jesus truly was and is. An essential task of Christian apologetics is demonstrating that Jesus Christ believed Himself to be God in the flesh, and demonstrated His Divine identity through His life, ministry, death, and resurrection. My prayer is for you to know that Jesus Christ demonstrated, through His Words and through His deeds, that He believed Himself to be (and in fact was) God in the flesh. In pursuit of that goal, we are going to look at words and deeds of Jesus that are accepted by almost all biblical scholars – including non-Christian scholars who absolutely reject the conclusions that I will draw. That is, the biblical evidence that we will survey together does not require you to believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God. I believe the Bible is both of those things – but the passages we will look at are generally accepted as authentic and historical even by scholars who reject the inspiration of Scripture.

Why, you might ask, would I want to limit us to passages that are accepted as authentically historical by radical atheistic scholars? Two reasons. First, because we can do so and still establish very powerfully and persuasively that Jesus Christ believed He was God incarnate. Second, because not everybody that we talk to accepts the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. I certainly do, and I know that most of you do as well. But I also have numerous friends and family members who do not. But even atheistic biblical scholars who think Jesus was just a radical dude acknowledge that much that is contained within the Gospels is literal history—an accurate record of Jesus’s words and deeds. And on the basis of such passages, we can show that Jesus believed He was God in the flesh. Even people who reject the authority of the Bible still have to deal with the person and work of Jesus Christ.
So – with that in mind, let’s look at the Jesus of the Gospels—who did Jesus think He was?

II. Who Did Jesus Think He Was?How do we determine who Jesus thought He was? There are two primary vehicles through which people demonstrate their assessment of themselves – their words and their deeds. So let’s look at what Jesus said about Himself, and then what He did to demonstrate who He was.

1. Jesus’ Words
How did Jesus understand and refer to Himself? What were the terms and titles that He used about Himself? There are three titles commonly used of Jesus in the Gospels.

a) Messiah
The first title used of Jesus, and the one most familiar to us, is the Hebrew “Messiah,” (or meschiach) whose Greek equivalent is “Christ,” (or Christos).
The title “Messiah” or “Christ” is not an explicitly divine title; rather, it is the acknowledgment of a divine anointing. King David was the “meshiach,” the anointed of the Lord. Others in the Old Testament shared that title. However, as Jewish history progressed, “Messiah” became a technical designation for the anointed of the Lord who was expected to come to redeem or rescue Israel from oppression and bondage. Very early on, “Christ” became the most popular title for Jesus, such that from Paul’s New Testament letters through to the modern church, it serves as a “surname” for Jesus. This title for Jesus is affirmed throughout the Gospels in many ways.

First, we find explicit affirmation that Jesus believed Himself to be the Messiah, the anointed Savior of Israel. Matthew 16:13-18 reads: When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”
They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
“But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”
Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.”

Second, Jesus implicitly affirms His Messianic identity. In Luke 7, John the Baptist begins to wonder whether Jesus is who John had thought Him to be (namely, the Messiah). So we see John send his own disciples to Jesus to ask, “Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?” In Luke 7:21-23, we find Jesus’ reply. At that very time Jesus cured many who had diseases, sicknesses and evil spirits, and gave sight to many who were blind. So he replied to the messengers, “Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor. Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me.”

Jesus’ reply, calling attention to the deeds He has been performing, hearken back to Is. 35:5-6 and Is. 61:1, which faithful Jews regarded as Messianic promises. In the first passage, Isaiah promises that in the time of the Messiah, Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped. Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue shout for joy. Isaiah 61:1, another Messianic promise, reads: The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is on me, because the Lord has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners. The words from Isaiah’s Messianic prophecies are echoed in the words that Jesus uses to reply to John’s disciples. “Yes, I am the Messiah – see how my ministry fulfills what was promised through the prophet Isaiah?” Jesus doesn’t have to come right out and say it; the allusions to Isaiah are sufficient implicit affirmation of His Messianic identity.

Finally, Jesus’ Messianic self-understanding is confirmed at His crucifixion. What did Pilate write on the placard on Jesus’ cross? Mark 15:26 reads: The written notice of the charge against him read: THE KING OF THE JEWS. This was the title given by Jews to the expected Messiah. As J. D. G. Dunn points out, Jesus was executed “on the charge of being a messianic pretender.” That is, Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, the coming redeemer of Israel – bringing a charge of treason, punishable by death. So explicitly and implicitly, Jesus claimed to be the Messiah.

b) Son of God
The second title used of Jesus in the Gospels is “Son of God.” Today, Son of God is understood as being an explicit claim to Godhood, but this was actually not the case in the 1st century. That is, claiming to be the Son of God did not automatically mean that Jesus was claiming to be God in the flesh. That does not mean, however, that the term is empty or meaningless—far from it! The title “Son of God” claims a unique intimate relationship and connection with God.

Jesus explicitly claims to be the Son. Let’s look at Matthew 11:25-27. At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

Strong words, identifying Jesus as having a unique family relationship with God.
Also, note the intimate claims to Sonhood contained in Jesus’ prayers. Mark 14:35-36: Going a little farther, Jesus fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him. “Abba, Father,” he said, “everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.” In all His prayers, Jesus refers to God as “Father.” This becomes more evident throughout the Gospel of John. Look through John 15-17 and notice how many times Jesus refers to “my Father,” “my Father in heaven,” and “the Father.” The intimate sonship that Jesus experienced and expressed was unheard of in Jewish religion. God was Lord, Yahweh, sovereign of the universe. But no self-respecting Jew would take it upon himself to call God “Father.” They would call Abraham “Father,” or Jacob, or even Moses. But to call God “Father” was to demonstrate spiritual arrogance and pride. Jesus, however, was comfortable praying to His “Father” in heaven, and even encouraged His followers to do the same.

c) Son of Man
While Messiah or Christ is the most popular title for Jesus today, and while Son of God carries (to our ears) the strongest claims to deity, the most important Gospel term used for Jesus is actually “Son of Man.” First it was Jesus’ favorite self-designation. This is what Jesus preferred to call Himself. For example, in Matthew 16:13, which we looked at earlier, Jesus asks His disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” Jesus uses the term 83 times for Himself in the Gospels. Second, Son of Man, although it sounds somewhat innocent to our post-modern ears, carried very explicit divine connotations in 1st century Palestine.

The self-designation invokes Daniel 7:13-14, which recounts a heavenly vision granted to the prophet Daniel. In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. Daniel’s Son of Man is a human-looking figure, but is endowed with divine attributes: dominion, everlasting kingdom, clouds of heaven. While the figure of the Son of Man was not highly visible in the Hebrew Old Testament, it became more so in the intertestamental period, in the Jewish apocryphal literature. The Son of Man was a figure of exaltation and vindication – the vindication both of the Son of Man and, through him, of the people of Israel as a whole. The Son of Man was the figure used by God to bring a final end to the exile of Israel – her oppression under foreign rulers. So, the title which Jesus chooses to use of Himself most frequently is this somewhat obscure, but very pregnant term which carries heavily divine overtones.

d) Mark 14:60-64 – the coup de grace
During Jesus’ trial with the Jewish Sanhedrin, we see this fascinating and crucial exchange.
Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.
Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?”
What is the high priest asking Jesus? The question is basically – Jesus, WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?!?! “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?”
“I am,” said Jesus, “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?” They all condemned him as worthy of death.

In this central confrontation, Jesus conflates all three self-designations into one. Are you the Christ? Yes. Are you the Son of the Blessed One? Yes. Not only that, I am the Son of Man. For good measure, Jesus adds that He will be “sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” To top it all off, he begins, once again, by invoking the divine name for himself – “I AM.” Folks, in 1st-century Judaism, it doesn’t get any more explicit than that. Yes, I am the Messiah, the anointed one. Yes, I am the Son of God; I have a unique, familiar relationship with God Almighty. I am the Son of Man, the divine deliverer of Daniel 7. And I will sit at the right hand of God the Father. I am God!

Did Jesus understand Himself to be divine, to be God incarnate? Yes – and the futile struggles of skeptical scholars (and the DaVinci Code) to argue otherwise ultimately shipwreck on passages like Mark 14. Jesus was crucified for being a blasphemer, a Messianic pretender. Jesus made radical claims for Himself, claims to be God in the flesh.

2. Jesus’ Deeds
But we do not just have Jesus’ self-understanding and self-designations to go on. Jesus also assumed divine authority and status through His works, His actions. Indeed, His actions speak louder than His words in many cases.

a) Authority to Forgive Sin
First, He takes upon Himself the right to forgive sin. Mark 2:1-12 relates a powerful story:

A few days later, when Jesus again entered Capernaum, the people heard that he had come home. So many gathered that there was no room left, not even outside the door, and he preached the word to them. Some men came, bringing to him a paralytic, carried by four of them. Since they could not get him to Jesus because of the crowd, they made an opening in the roof above Jesus and, after digging through it, lowered the mat the paralyzed man was lying on. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”
Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Who has the right to forgive sins? Only God, and according to the teachers of the law, only through the sacrificial system. The teachers of the law are asking – “Who does this Jesus fellow think he is?!” Jesus is claiming for Himself the divine authority to bypass the temple altogether and forgive sins Himself, in His own name. The passage continues:

Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things? Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk?’ But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins …” He said to the paralytic, “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.” He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, “We have never seen anything like this!”

b) Authority to Determine Eternal Destiny
Jesus claims authority to forgive sin, but even more astounding, he claims the authority and right to determine people’s eternal destiny. Let’s illustrate this with a few passages. In Luke 12:8-9, Jesus says, “I tell you, whoever acknowledges me before men, the Son of Man will also acknowledge him before the angels of God. But he who disowns me before men will be disowned before the angels of God.” In John 10:24-28, we read: Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon’s Colonnade. The Jews gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” In other words, “Jesus – who do you think you are? Who are you?!”

Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father’s name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.”

Again, this is merely a taste of the divine authority that Jesus assumes – to determine people’s eternal destiny. There are many more passages in the Gospels that we could go to, but those suffice to prove the point.

c) Authority to Teach Divine Truth
Perhaps even more astounding, at least to the Jews of the 1st century, Jesus also took upon Himself the authority to teach divine truth in His own name. The best demonstration of this is found in the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew chapters 5-7. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus insists: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them.

In other words, Jesus claims to be the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Then, beginning in verse 21, we find a series of six teachings. Each time, he begins: You have heard that it was said; and continues by claiming, But I tell you. Jesus takes either an Old Testament law, or else a rabbinical interpretation of an Old Testament law, and turns it upside down. He deepens the teachings and challenges the authority of the Pharisees and the scribes as interpreters. And He does it on His own authority! Thus, at the end of the Sermon on the Mount, we read (7:28-29): When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law.

Jesus takes upon Himself the teaching and guiding authority of God Almighty. In the same way, Jesus uses the formula “amen, amen,” or “I tell you the truth” (NIV) or “Truly, truly I say to you” (NAS) to introduce His divine teaching authority. This formula is used twenty-five times in John’s Gospel (e.g. John 3:3 and 3:5), and shows that Jesus is not merely speaking for God, but is speaking as God. As Ben Witherington says, “Here was someone who thought he possessed not only divine inspiration … but also divine authority and the power of direct divine utterance.”

d) Authority to Heal & Exorcise Demons
Throughout the Gospels, we also see Jesus assuming the authority to perform miraculous healings and exorcisms. In Mark 9:14-28, we see a lengthy exorcism described and narrated. Amongst others, we see miraculous healings of leprosy (Luke 5:12-14), distance healings (Luke 7:1-10), healing the blind (John 9:1-12), and raising the dead (John 11:1-44). New Testament scholars are increasingly coming to the conclusion that miraculous faith healings were an integral part of Jesus’ ministry. Many of those scholars refuse to believe that they actually happened, at least in any kind of miraculous sense; but they admit that you cannot explain them out of the Gospels. They are a key historical piece of Jesus’ life and ministry.

e) Jesus’ Cumulative Authority in Matthew 8-9
Matthew 8-9 contain a beautiful cumulative description of the all-inclusive authority of Jesus.
(i) Lord of Sickness & Disease (8:1-4, 5-13, 14-17)
(ii) Lord of Nature (8:23-27)
(iii) Lord of Spirits (8:28-34)
(iv) Lord of Sin (9:1-8)
(v) Lord of the Traditions of the Elders (9:14-17)
(vi) Lord of Death (9:18-26)

When you put together what Jesus says about Himself and what He does, you are left with the unmistakeable impression that He thought He possessed divine authority. Years ago, C. S. Lewis posed his famous trilemma about the person of Jesus Christ. “A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg – or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

When we examine the historical evidence to answer the question “Who Does Jesus Think He Is?” the answer which echoes back is: “God.”

Bono, lead singer of the band U2, was asked about his Christian faith. The interviewer asked, “We all know Jesus was a great teacher and moral example. But all that Christian stuff about him being God, isn’t that a little far-fetched?” Bono had this to say in response. “Look, the secular response to the Christ story always goes like this: He was a great prophet, obviously a very interesting guy, had a lot to say along the lines of other great prophets, be they Elijah, Muhammad, Buddha, or Confucius. But actually Christ doesn’t allow you that. He doesn’t let you off that hook. Christ says, No. I’m not saying I’m a teacher, don’t call me teacher. I’m not saying I’m a prophet. I’m saying: ‘I’m the Messiah.’ I’m saying: ‘I am God incarnate.’ … So what you’re left with is either Christ was who He said He was—the Messiah—or a complete nutcase. … [and] the idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside-down by a nutcase, for me that’s far-fetched.”

Skeptics will often refuse to embrace the terms of C. S. Lewis’ trilemma. Instead, they will respond by saying: “There’s a fourth option. I acknowledge that the Jesus presented in the Gospels claims to be divine. But I don’t think that account is an accurate record of what Jesus said and did. The Jesus of the Gospels is legend.” Thus, the skeptic tries to make the trilemma into a quadrilemma – Jesus is either liar, lunatic, lord, or legend. And they choose legend.

That is why I began this apologetics series not with the self-understanding of Jesus, but rather with the question of the historical reliability of the Gospels, followed by their textual integrity. The discussion of the previous two weeks demonstrates why legend is not a legitimate option. The Gospels are historically reliable. They were written very close to the time of the events that they narrate. They claim to contain eyewitness testimony, and that claim is confirmed both by the internal evidence within the Gospels (the presence of numerous incidental details) and the external evidence supplied by archaeology and other ancient literature. The Gospels were written and began circulating at a time when there were still numerous living eyewitnesses, both friends and foes, who could have countered any details that were incorrect. But we do not find that. Rather, both friends and foes accept the historical accuracy of the Gospels. Friends (Christians) proclaim it as Gospel truth, and worship the Savior and Lord contained therein. Foes (Jews and Romans) denounce the miracle-working Jesus as a sorcerer, a tool of the devil. All alike acknowledge the astounding claims that Jesus makes for Himself (indeed, the Jews have him crucified for those claims!), and the incredible miracles that He performs. The Gospels are historically reliable. Furthermore, the text of the Gospels is intact – it reflects what was originally written. Textual criticism has established with strong certainty the faithfulness of our current Greek text to the original autographs. Given the historical reliability and textual integrity of the New Testament Gospels, one cannot claim that the Jesus contained therein is a legend. It is simply not an option. Lewis’ trilemma stands – you can reject him as a liar, lock him up as a lunatic, or worship him as Lord and God. But you must make your choice!

The refusal of some scholars and skeptics to accept the logical conclusions of the Gospel record is due not to lack of historical evidence but to their personal prejudices—the logic of their atheistic or naturalistic worldview. In other words, people refuse to grant the conclusion that Jesus believed He was incarnate God simply because they are unwilling to accept that Jesus was incarnate God! Yet this is who the historical record in the Gospels clearly, consistently, and authoritatively present to us: Jesus the Messiah, the Son of God, the Son of Man. Jesus, who has the authority to forgive sin, who will determine men’s eternal destinies, who has the authority to teach divine truths in His own name, who has the ability to heal sickness in his own name. The Jesus presented by the historical record is a Jesus who talks and acts like one who believes he is, and is in fact, God in the flesh. Jesus shows himself to be the Christ, the divine Son of God who dies on a cross in order to save His people from their sins, the one who rose again on the third day, the one who now sits at the right hand of God the Father, and who will come again. So, having answered the question, “Who do you think you are?”, and identifying who Jesus is, the question now becomes turned toward us: “What are you going to do with this Jesus?” The options, ultimately, are few in number. You can ignore him, at your own peril; you can reject Him, to your own loss; or you can accept and worship Him as Savior and Lord, to the glory of God the Father.